[Basic Set] Question about turn sequence

[Scolop]

Combatant A takes his turn first and chooses the All-Out Attack maneuver. Combatant B dodges the attack. In his turn, can Combatant B also choose the All-Out Attack maneuver, considering he has used an active defense before his turn?

I'd say he can, since it wasn't his turn when he defended, but I'd just like to clear this up. It certainly favors those who act later when their opponents choose a maneuver that limits their own defenses.

[sir_pudding]

Your turn doesn't start until it is your turn.

Going first benefits you because of shock penalties and the other effects of injury, as well as being able to take advantage of cover and positioning.

Also if B AoAs, then he gets no defense on As next turn.

[Scolop]

Thanks, guys.

If you take into account that both combatants chose All-Out Attack in their first turns, B got an active defense against A, while A didn't get any defense at all. So B is standing better after the first turns.

This tradeoff also applies to any maneuver that limits defenses, such as Committed Attack. But I'm okay with that.

[arnej]

Originally Posted by Scolop

Thanks, guys.

If you take into account that both combatants chose All-Out Attack in their first turns, B got an active defense against A, while A didn't get any defense at all. So B is standing better after the first turns.

Just so you're clear that now on his second turn A can attack B and B has no defense.

arnej

[trooper6]

Originally Posted by Scolop

Thanks, guys.

If you take into account that both combatants chose All-Out Attack in their first turns, B got an active defense against A, while A didn't get any defense at all. So B is standing better after the first turns.

This tradeoff also applies to any maneuver that limits defenses, such as Committed Attack. But I'm okay with that.

It is important to conceptualize that there isn't a universal first turn. Each person has their own turns. B didn't get a defense during their first turn...because their first turn hadn't started yet.

It is that famous diagram:

|--A1--|--A2--|--A3--|
.....|--B1--|--B2--|--B3--|

Combat starts.
A1. A begins their turn and All-Out Attacks B...who hasn't started their first turn yet. B defends.
B1. B begins their turn and All-Out Attacks. A, who is still in their first turn, cannot defend.
A2. A ends their first turn and begins their second turn. A does a regular attack on B. B, who is still in their first turn, cannot defend.
B2. B ends their first turn and begins their second turn. A does another All-Out Attack. B, who is still in their second turn, defends.

So to disentangle.
A All-Out Attacks on their first turn and is not able to defend that turn.
B All-Out Attacks on their first turn and is not able to defend that turn.

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Scolop

Thanks, guys.

If you take into account that both combatants chose All-Out Attack in their first turns, B got an active defense against A, while A didn't get any defense at all. So B is standing better after the first turns.

This tradeoff also applies to any maneuver that limits defenses, such as Committed Attack. But I'm okay with that.

Until your first active turn begins, and you select a maneuver, you are assumed to have been under the rules of the Do Nothing maneuver. All-Out Attack never effects your action before your turn begins.

Edit to add: Basically, All-Out Attack should only be used when you're confident your opponent won't be able to retaliate, or when you can safely ignore any counterattack (e.g. You have enough armor to prevent any injury)

[Celti]

If you're worried about the system “favouring those who act later” then you need to really grok the Wait maneuver.

Take your example: Adam begins the combat by All-Out Attacking Bruce. Bruce responds by All-Out Attacking Adam. This superficially might favour Bruce.

Now, what if Adam took a Wait maneuver to All-Out Attack when he saw Bruce initiate an All-Out Attack? Now the sequence is: Adam Waits, Bruce All-Out Attacks, Adam interrupts Bruce's All-Out Attack with his own All-Out Attack — and because Bruce is All-Out Attacking, he gets no defense. Their situations are exactly reversed, and the turn sequence now superficially favours Adam.

It actually more than superficially favours whoever has the highest Basic Speed, because of the entire way the Wait maneuver works: if you have the highest Basic Speed, you can (theoretically) react at any point during the turn sequence: whatever point you consider most advantageous.

[McAllister]

Regarding the advantage one might possess going second, Celti is correct; Wait should take care of that.

Regarding All-Out Attack, if your opponent might be able to retaliate after such an attack, it really is a poor decision. That's why Berserk is a disadvantage: it comes with some hefty defensive bonuses, but will they stop you from getting cut down while you can't defend yourself? Not necessarily.

[Critical]

Originally Posted by Scolop

Combatant A takes his turn first and chooses the All-Out Attack maneuver. Combatant B dodges the attack. In his turn, can Combatant B also choose the All-Out Attack maneuver, considering he has used an active defense before his turn?

I'd say he can, since it wasn't his turn when he defended, but I'd just like to clear this up. It certainly favors those who act later when their opponents choose a maneuver that limits their own defenses.

There is a conditional here that has been ignored in concluding it is advantageous to act later; we're assuming B survives A's opening salvo by successfully dodging. If A has a powerhouse attack that is tough to ward off, it is certainly not to B's advantage to go second. A also has a chance to critically hit, denying B any opportunity to dodge. If we're going to assume B successfully defends, then of course it makes A's opening with an AoA look bad.